Cargando…

Comparison of performance in a four year graduate entry medical programme and a traditional five/six year programme

BACKGROUND: In 2006 the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, (RCSI), introduced the first four year Graduate Entry Programme (GEP) in medicine in Ireland in line with national policy to broaden access to medical education. One concern considered at the time, was whether the GEP students could be tr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Byrne, Annette T, Arnett, Richard, Farrell, Tom, Sreenan, Seamus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4267744/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25491032
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-014-0248-3
_version_ 1782349190007881728
author Byrne, Annette T
Arnett, Richard
Farrell, Tom
Sreenan, Seamus
author_facet Byrne, Annette T
Arnett, Richard
Farrell, Tom
Sreenan, Seamus
author_sort Byrne, Annette T
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In 2006 the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, (RCSI), introduced the first four year Graduate Entry Programme (GEP) in medicine in Ireland in line with national policy to broaden access to medical education. One concern considered at the time, was whether the GEP students could be trained to the same standard as their undergraduate Direct Entry Programme (DEP, five/six year duration) counterparts in the shorter time frame. Since students from both cohorts undertake the same examinations in the final two years, it is possible to directly compare GEP vs DEP outcomes. The primary aim of the current study was to analyse the comparative performance of GEP and DEP students undergoing these examinations between 2008 and 2013. METHODS: Scores from five assessments performed during the final two years were transformed to z scores for each student and 4 scores for the penultimate year were summed to create a unit weighted composite score. The resultant scores for each of the two years were used to assess the comparative performance of GEP vs DEP cohorts and to perform sub-cohort analyses of GEP outcomes. RESULTS: In all cohorts/years examined, evidence demonstrated significantly better assessment outcomes for the GEP group for the final two years’ examinations as compared with the DEP group. In all but one cohort examined, this advantage was retained when nationality factors were excluded. Further analyses showed no difference in outcomes between GEP students having science vs. non-science backgrounds and/or between those from EU vs non-EU backgrounds. Finally, data suggested weak correlations between total composite scores and entry scores in American (r = 0.15) and Australian (r = 0.08) medical school admissions tests. CONCLUSIONS: We have shown for the first time in Ireland, that graduate-entry students perform at least as well, or even better, than a corresponding undergraduate-entry group. Moreover, having a scientific background on entry to the GEP confers no advantage in final assessments. These data provide evidence of the viability of the graduate entry route into medical education in Ireland.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4267744
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42677442014-12-17 Comparison of performance in a four year graduate entry medical programme and a traditional five/six year programme Byrne, Annette T Arnett, Richard Farrell, Tom Sreenan, Seamus BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: In 2006 the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, (RCSI), introduced the first four year Graduate Entry Programme (GEP) in medicine in Ireland in line with national policy to broaden access to medical education. One concern considered at the time, was whether the GEP students could be trained to the same standard as their undergraduate Direct Entry Programme (DEP, five/six year duration) counterparts in the shorter time frame. Since students from both cohorts undertake the same examinations in the final two years, it is possible to directly compare GEP vs DEP outcomes. The primary aim of the current study was to analyse the comparative performance of GEP and DEP students undergoing these examinations between 2008 and 2013. METHODS: Scores from five assessments performed during the final two years were transformed to z scores for each student and 4 scores for the penultimate year were summed to create a unit weighted composite score. The resultant scores for each of the two years were used to assess the comparative performance of GEP vs DEP cohorts and to perform sub-cohort analyses of GEP outcomes. RESULTS: In all cohorts/years examined, evidence demonstrated significantly better assessment outcomes for the GEP group for the final two years’ examinations as compared with the DEP group. In all but one cohort examined, this advantage was retained when nationality factors were excluded. Further analyses showed no difference in outcomes between GEP students having science vs. non-science backgrounds and/or between those from EU vs non-EU backgrounds. Finally, data suggested weak correlations between total composite scores and entry scores in American (r = 0.15) and Australian (r = 0.08) medical school admissions tests. CONCLUSIONS: We have shown for the first time in Ireland, that graduate-entry students perform at least as well, or even better, than a corresponding undergraduate-entry group. Moreover, having a scientific background on entry to the GEP confers no advantage in final assessments. These data provide evidence of the viability of the graduate entry route into medical education in Ireland. BioMed Central 2014-12-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4267744/ /pubmed/25491032 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-014-0248-3 Text en © Byrne et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Byrne, Annette T
Arnett, Richard
Farrell, Tom
Sreenan, Seamus
Comparison of performance in a four year graduate entry medical programme and a traditional five/six year programme
title Comparison of performance in a four year graduate entry medical programme and a traditional five/six year programme
title_full Comparison of performance in a four year graduate entry medical programme and a traditional five/six year programme
title_fullStr Comparison of performance in a four year graduate entry medical programme and a traditional five/six year programme
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of performance in a four year graduate entry medical programme and a traditional five/six year programme
title_short Comparison of performance in a four year graduate entry medical programme and a traditional five/six year programme
title_sort comparison of performance in a four year graduate entry medical programme and a traditional five/six year programme
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4267744/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25491032
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-014-0248-3
work_keys_str_mv AT byrneannettet comparisonofperformanceinafouryeargraduateentrymedicalprogrammeandatraditionalfivesixyearprogramme
AT arnettrichard comparisonofperformanceinafouryeargraduateentrymedicalprogrammeandatraditionalfivesixyearprogramme
AT farrelltom comparisonofperformanceinafouryeargraduateentrymedicalprogrammeandatraditionalfivesixyearprogramme
AT sreenanseamus comparisonofperformanceinafouryeargraduateentrymedicalprogrammeandatraditionalfivesixyearprogramme